Hayes, Daniel F.

PURPOSE Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) is common during adjuvant chemotherapy and may persist. TAILORx provided a novel opportunity to prospectively assess patient-reported cognitive impairment among women with early breast cancer who were randomly assigned to chemoendocrine therapy (CT+E) versus endocrine therapy alone (E), allowing us to quantify the unique contribution of chemotherapy to CRCI. METHODS Women with a 21-gene recurrence score of 11 to 25 enrolled in TAILORX were randomly assigned to CT+E or E. Cognitive impairment was assessed among a subgroup of 552 evaluable women using the 37-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function (FACT-Cog) questionnaire, administered at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. The FACT-Cog included the 20-item Perceived Cognitive Impairment (PCI) scale, our primary end point. Clinically meaningful changes were defined a priori and linear regression was used to model PCI scores on baseline PCI, treatment, and other factors. RESULTS FACT-Cog PCI scores were significantly lower, indicating more impairment, at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months compared with baseline for both groups. The magnitude of PCI change scores was greater for CT+E than E at 3 months, the prespecified primary trial end point, and at 6 months, but not at 12, 24, and 36 months. Tests of an interaction between menopausal status and treatment were nonsignificant. CONCLUSION Adjuvant CT+E is associated with significantly greater CRCI compared with E at 3 and 6 months. These differences abated over time, with no significant differences observed at 12 months and beyond. These findings indicate that chemotherapy produces early, but not sustained, cognitive impairment relative to E, providing reassurance to patients and clinicians in whom adjuvant chemotherapy is indicated to reduce recurrence risk.

1052 Background: TIG, an agonistic anti-DR5 monoclonal antibody, triggers apoptosis in DR5+ human tumor cells without the aid of crosslinking. TIG has shown strong in vitro and in vivo activity against basal-like breast cancer cells that is enhanced by chemotherapy like paclitaxel. Methods: Randomized 2:1 phase II trial of nab-PAC with/without TIG in TNBC patients. Patients stratified by prior exposure to chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Patients received nab-PAC weekly x 3 and TIG every other week, every 28 days. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary objectives were safety, progression free survival (PFS), TIG immunogenicity, and PK. Biopsies and circulating tumor cells were collected. The trial was not powered to compare arms but allowed early stopping for futility and was sized to estimate ORR with 95% CI. Results: 64 patients enrolled, 60 treated; 39 in the combination arm and 21 in the nab-PAC arm. Of the 39 in the combination arm, there were 2 CR, 9 PR (1 near CR, 96% tumor reduction), 11 SD and 17 PD; ORR 28% (95% CI 14%-42%). Of the 21 in the single agent arm, there were no CR, 8 PR, 4 SD and 9 PD; ORR 38% (95% CI 17%-59%). Higher ORRs were seen in the chemotherapy naïve patients (58% vs. 15% combination and 42% vs. 35% single agent). 2 patients with CR, 1 near CR, and 1 PR in the combination arm are still on therapy (602+, 531+, 466+, 460+ days). PFS was similar in both groups (3.6 months); higher in chemotherapy naïve patients. Combination was well tolerated (most toxicities grade 1/2); the most common AEs were fatigue, alopecia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, anemia, neutropenia, nausea, thrombocytopenia, anorexia, diarrhea, and vomiting. No grade 4 or 5 toxicity. No apparent added toxicity with TIG was seen. Conclusions: Combination therapy with nab-PAC + TIG was well tolerated, without apparent improvement in ORR relative to nab-PAC alone; however, 4 subjects treated as first-line had prolonged clinical benefit with the combination, and correlative studies will investigate markers that might predict clinical outcome (Next-Gen genomic analysis). Clinical trial information: F101004001.

510 Background: CALGB 9344 showed 4 cycles of paclitaxel (T) after 4 cycles of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) improved disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to 4 cycles of AC. Higher dose of A had no benefit (Henderson JCO ’03). Prior studies suggest HER2 is associated with benefit from standard vs low dose of C&A (Dressler JCO ’05). We hypothesized that HER2 might predict benefit from higher dose of A or from T, and that HER2 might refine the observed negative interaction of T with estrogen receptor (ER). Methods: 3121 node + women in CALGB 9344 received 4 q3wk cycles of AC (A: 60, 75, or 90 mg/m2) and then 4 cycles of T (175 mg/m2 q3wk) or no T. Blocks were collected from ∼2800 subjects. 2 sets of 750 patients each were randomly selected from these cases: Set 1 to develop hypotheses; Set 2 for validation. Tissue specimens were available from 643 (set1) and 679 (set2) cases (20% & 22% total enrolled in 9344 respectively). HER2 was evaluated by FISH and by IHC (by antibody cb11 and by Herceptest). Statistical analyses used Cox proportional hazards models, including interaction terms, and Kaplan-Meier estimates for comparing 5-yr DFS by treatment group. Results: In Set 1, all 3 assays suggested that T improved DFS for HER2+ but not for HER2-. For this single set the interaction was not statistically significant. There appeared to be an interaction of HER2, T and ER. IHC using cb11 was applied to Set 2, revealing nearly identical results. In the two sets combined (n=1322), the interaction between HER2 and T was statistically significant (p=0.013). The 3-way interaction of HER2, ER and T was hypothesis-generating and not tested statistically. Differences in 5-yr DFS rates (95% CI) for T vs. no T by HER2 and ER (both sets combined) There was no interaction between HER2 and dose of A. Conclusions: These results suggest that the benefit of adding T to AC is greater for HER2+ tumors, even if ER+, while T was of no apparent benefit in the ER+, HER2- group. Further validation is needed from remaining cases in 9344 and from other trials involving T. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

AimsChemotherapy‐induced peripheral neuropathy (PN) is a treatment limiting toxicity of paclitaxel. We evaluated if EPHA genetic variation (EPHA4, EPHA5, EPHA6, and EPHA8) is associated with PN sensitivity by accounting for variability in systemic paclitaxel exposure (time above threshold).MethodsGermline DNA from 60 patients with breast cancer was sequenced. PN was measured using the 8‐item sensory subscale (CIPN8) of the patient‐reported CIPN20. Associations for 3 genetic models were tested by incorporating genetics into previously published PN prediction models integrating measured paclitaxel exposure and cumulative treatment. Significant associations were then tested for association with PN‐related treatment disruption.ResultsEPHA5 rs7349683 (minor allele frequency = 0.32) was associated with increased PN sensitivity (β‐coefficient = 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.11–0.67, p = 0.007). Setting a maximum tolerable threshold of CIPN8 = 30, optimal paclitaxel exposure target is shorter for rs7349683 homozygous (11.6 h) than heterozygous (12.6 h) or wild‐type (13.6 h) patients. Total number of missense variants (median = 0, range 0–2) was associated with decreased PN sensitivity (β‐coefficient: −0.42, 95% confidence interval −0.72 to −0.12, P = .006). No association with treatment disruption was detected for the total number of missense variants or rs7349683.ConclusionIsolating toxicity sensitivity by accounting for exposure is a novel approach, and rs7349683 represents a promising marker for PN sensitivity that may be used to individualize paclitaxel treatment.

Abstract Background Adjuvant bisphosphonates, when given in a low-estrogen environment, can decrease breast cancer recurrence and death. Treatment guidelines include recommendations for adjuvant bisphosphonates in postmenopausal patients. SWOG/Alliance/Canadian Cancer Trials Group/ECOG-ACRIN/NRG Oncology study S0307 compared the efficacy of three bisphosphonates in early-stage breast cancer. Methods Patients with stage I–III breast cancer were randomly assigned to 3 years of intravenous zoledronic acid, oral clodronate, or oral ibandronate. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) with overall survival as a secondary outcome. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results A total of 6097 patients enrolled. Median age was 52.7 years. Prior to being randomly assigned, 73.2% patients indicated preference for oral vs intravenous formulation. DFS did not differ across arms in a log-rank test (P = .49); 5-year DFS was 88.3% (zoledronic acid: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.9% to 89.6%), 87.6% (clodronate: 95% CI = 86.1% to 88.9%), and 87.4% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 85.6% to 88.9%). Additionally, 5-year overall survival did not differ between arms (log rank P = .50) and was 92.6% (zoledronic acid: 95% CI = 91.4% to 93.6%), 92.4% (clodronate: 95% CI = 91.2% to 93.5%), and 92.9% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 91.5% to 94.1%). Bone as first site of recurrence did not differ between arms (P = .93). Analyses based on age and tumor subtypes showed no treatment differences. Grade 3/4 toxicity was 8.8% (zoledronic acid), 8.3% (clodronate), and 10.5% (ibandronate). Osteonecrosis of the jaw was highest for zoledronic acid (1.26%) compared with clodronate (0.36%) and ibandronate (0.77%). Conclusions We found no evidence of differences in efficacy by type of bisphosphonate, either in overall analysis or subgroups. Despite an increased rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw with zoledronic acid, overall toxicity grade differed little across arms. Given that patients expressed preference for oral formulation, efforts to make oral agents available in the United States should be considered.

532 Background: Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common, debilitating paclitaxel side effect that has been primarily attributed to cumulative systemic paclitaxel exposure. Paclitaxel dose-adjustment to achieve target systemic exposure decreases but does not eliminate severe CIPN, suggesting some patients are inherently CIPN-sensitive. Ephrin ( EPHA) polymorphisms have been reported to increase CIPN occurrence (Baldwin 2012, Leandro-Garcia 2013, Boora 2016) but replication has been challenging, perhaps due to the inability to isolate CIPN-sensitivity by accounting for systemic exposure differences. The study purpose was to determine if EPHA genetic variants previously associated with CIPN occurrence are associated with CIPN-sensitivity. Methods: PN was assessed at baseline and weekly using the 8-item sensory subscale (CIPN8) of the patient-reported EORTC CIPN20 in patients receiving paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly x 12. EPHA4, EPHA5, EPHA6, and EPHA8 were sequenced in germline DNA. Associations with higher PN-sensitivity were tested for three genetic models (total variants, coding variants, and rs7349683) by incorporating genetics into previously published CIPN8 predictive models that included measured paclitaxel exposure. Significant associations were tested for association with higher risk of PN-related treatment disruption (i.e. dose decrease, delay, or discontinuation). Results: In the 59 included patients, carrying EPHA5 rs7349683 was associated with greater CIPN sensitivity (beta coefficient: 0.40, standard error: 0.14, p = 0.005), indicating these patients had a greater increase in CIPN8 during treatment than would be predicted based on cumulative paclitaxel exposure. Rs7349683 was not associated with increased PN-induced treatment disruption, perhaps due to the low number of events (n = 19). Conclusions: Using a novel approach that isolates CIPN-sensitivity by accounting for measured paclitaxel exposure, our results provide further evidence that EPHA5 rs7349683 may be a promising marker for CIPN. If additional validation studies confirm this association, genetic testing could enable personalized treatment strategies to prevent CIPN in patients with breast cancer.

503 Background: TAILORx established that endocrine therapy (ET) alone is non-inferior to adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) plus ET in EBC and a 21-gene RS of 11-25, with some benefit if ≤50 years (y) with RS 16-25 (PMID: 29860917). We evaluated whether clinical risk (tumor size & histologic grade) provides additional prognostic information to RS, a secondary trial objective. Methods: Clinical risk by was assessed by Adjuvant! (version 8.0) using MINDACT criteria (PMID 27557300), defined as low clinical risk (LCR - tumor ≤3 cm and low grade, <2 cm and intermediate grade, or ≤1 cm and high grade) or high clinical risk (HCR -not meeting LCR criteria). Results: Of 9427 women with RS and clinical risk information, 70% were LCR and 30% HCR, with comparable distribution by age ( ≤50 vs. >50). The RS was 26-100 in 9% of LCR and 27% of HCR patients, with similar distributions by age. Although LCR/HCR provided additional prognostic information in each RS category for iDFS, including RS 0-10 (9-year rates 86.7% vs. 75.7% LCR vs. HCR), 11-25 (85.4% vs. 78.9%), and 26-100 (82.0% vs. 70.4%), iDFS rates were similar irrespective of CT (no vs. yes) in the entire RS 11-25 cohort whether LCR (85.8% vs. 85.1%) or HCR (79.8% vs. 77.9%). DRFI rates were also similar irrespective of CT in the RS 11-25 cohort or > 50y group whether LCR (96.0% vs. 96.1% overall; 96.5% vs. 96.0% > 50y) or HCR (92.3% vs. 89.9% overall; 91.7% vs. 90.7% >50y). For women ≤50y, the absolute reduction in distant recurrence from CT with a RS of 16-20 (N=923) was -0.2% (standard error [SE]±2.1%) for LCR vs. 6.5%(SE±4.9%) for HCR (vs. 1.6%[SE±1.9%] overall), whereas for a RS 21-25 (N=492) it was 6.4% (SE±4.9%) for LCR vs. 8.6% (SE±6.2%) for HCR (vs. 6.5%[SE±3.7%] overall). Conclusions: Clinical risk stratification provides additional prognostic information to the 21-gene RS, but not prediction of CT benefit in the overall TAILORx population or those > 50y, and facilitates more refined estimates of absolute CT benefit for women ≤50y with a RS 16-25. (Funded by National Cancer Institute, Komen Foundation, Breast Cancer Research Foundation). Clinical trial information: NCT00310180.